Oscar Pistorius (Blade Runner) Arrested (Read 549 times)

I've been confused beyond belief during a home invasion at 10:45pm. Beyond belief!

I didn't know who anybody was nor did I know where anybody was or why it was happening. I walked throughout the house like a zombie with a broken in front door, no vision (I'm blind w/o corrective lenses), alarm blazing, and alarm company calling.

I don't take medication and I don't drink alcohol. Yet, I was thoroughly disoriented, dangerous, and I put myself in harms way. Unlike any other time in my life, I was lost (except for the time I was awaken by golf ball sized hail when I thought it was a flippen tornado, but that's another fricken bad story of waking up disoriented, and I'll save you the details from that episode).

Fortunately, the intruder left the house through the front door while I strolled outside the front door to see why my front door opened. At the time, I think I thought I forgot to close it. I couldn't give any description to the police.

I'm about as conservative as people would know (2nd ammendment, libertarian, etc), but this explanation as described by OP is my worst nightmare (whether it's as he described or not).

And that is why I do not have weapons anywhere near my bed anymore.

And don't dare call my home or cell after I close my eyes at 9:00pm!

Seriously, what I read from his story could easily have been me if I wasn't zombie like and if I took a defense mode within the 1st few seconds of waking up.

(And this post has nothing to do with gun control)

I can identify with the confusion....similar situation, it was an elightening experience to say the least...but there is a pretty big leap to blindly shooting through a door when you are not in immediate danger and have not clearly identified your target. Liberty (ie gun ownership) comes with responsibility. If one is wreckless enough to act the way he describes in his own account, he deserves what is likely coming to him.

"If you want to be a bad a$s, then do what a bad a$s does. There's your pep talk for today. Go Run." -- Slo_Hand

I can identify with the confusion....similar situation, it was an elightening experience to say the least...but there is a pretty big leap to blindly shooting through a door when you are not in immediate danger and have not clearly identified your target. Liberty (ie gun ownership) comes with responsibility. If one is wreckless enough to act the way he describes in his own account, he deserves what is likely coming to him.

Lawyers: even if Pistorius' account is totally true, how much does it matter that he was mistaken about the identity of the person he shot? I mean obviously for him it is sad that it ended up being his girlfriend, but it could have been anyone, and it would have been equally sad in a larger sense.

In other words, he obviously acted intentionally to murder someone whose only crime was making noise in his bathroom. Any other knowledge that Pistorius had of this person (that they had broken in, etc.) was purely speculative and imagined by him. Isn't this already murder?

I have no idea about the specific criminal laws in South Africa, but usually "justifiable homicide" requires some proportionality in the use of force. Can't bring a gun to a fight over Skittles. Which is to say, obviously, there are exceptions, and the specific facts and law matter a lot.

MTA: it's not a mistaken identity question so much as an intent question. For it to be a justifiable homicide, he would have to have some reasonable fear of imminent harm or reason to prevent a crime. And how could you reasonably hold those beliefs if you didn't even know who was behind the door?

I have no idea about the specific criminal laws in South Africa, but usually "justifiable homicide" requires some proportionality in the use of force. Can't bring a gun to a fight over Skittles. Which is to say, obviously, there are exceptions, and the specific facts and law matter a lot.

MTA: it's not a mistaken identity question so much as an intent question. For it to be a justifiable homicide, he would have to have some reasonable fear of imminent harm or reason to prevent a crime. And how could you reasonably hold those beliefs if you didn't even know who was behind the door?

My understanding under the Castle Doctrine in Texas Law, you could confront an unarmed burglar with your own gun, they could drop your items and turn and start running away from you and you could shoot them multiple times in the back as they were running away and it is considered justifiable homicide. Not sure if they have done any studies since the law was passed a few years ago, but I would guess burglary rates are way down.

My understanding under the Castle Doctrine in Texas Law, you could confront an unarmed burglar with your own gun, they could drop your items and turn and start running away from you and you could shoot them multiple times in the back as they were running away and it is considered justifiable homicide. Not sure if they have done any studies since the law was passed a few years ago, but I would guess burglary rates are way down.

No offence.. but.. the crap in your home can be replaced. That.. and Im not sure it reduces crime.

I'm not saying I would shoot an unarmed burglar in my home running away or not, I'm just saying that in many states, it would be considered justifiable homicide. Most of those states have a stand your ground provision as well. It would make me very hesitant to walk into someones home uninvited that's for sure.

My understanding under the Castle Doctrine in Texas Law, you could confront an unarmed burglar with your own gun, they could drop your items and turn and start running away from you and you could shoot them multiple times in the back as they were running away and it is considered justifiable homicide. Not sure if they have done any studies since the law was passed a few years ago, but I would guess burglary rates are way down.

I would question that conclusion. If they are no longer trying to remove your property and are attempting to flee, it appears not. If they are trying to remove your property and you are unlikely to recover it without using deadly force, you may have a defense.

Whether you want to risk your freedom and everything you own to recover your stereo is another matter. Yeah, compared to most states I am familiar with Texas has a more permissive law by even allowing deadly force in property crimes.

"If you want to be a bad a$s, then do what a bad a$s does. There's your pep talk for today. Go Run." -- Slo_Hand

the LED bulb ain't far better than anything we've had before .... yet.

And don't even bring up the color output of LEDs vs incandescents.

On just about every measure but price, LEDs rule.

Lifespan

Energy efficiency

Environmental impact

Safety (does not contain mercury like CFLs)

Durability

Performance (quick on, dimmable)

According to Popular Mechanics:

LEDs perform well in all lighting applications, including recessed lighting, and unlike all but specialized compact fluorescent bulbs LEDs are dimmable. Because of recent advances in optics, LEDs have a quality of light superior to all other types of lighting—and they deliver it more efficiently.

I would question that conclusion. If they are no longer trying to remove your property and are attempting to flee, it appears not. If they are trying to remove your property and you are unlikely to recover it without using deadly force, you may have a defense.

Whether you want to risk your freedom and everything you own to recover your stereo is another matter. Yeah, compared to most states I am familiar with Texas has a more permissive law by even allowing deadly force in property crimes.

I probably am streching it a little bit with my scenario, but Texas law is pretty liberal on the use of deadly force in your own home against an intruder. I sure wouldn't want to be a burglar in Texas that's for sure.

For it to be a justifiable homicide, he would have to have some reasonable fear of imminent harm or reason to prevent a crime. And how could you reasonably hold those beliefs if you didn't even know who was behind the door?

I think I see your point. So just the fact that he didn't know who was behind the door precludes it from being classified as a justifiable homicide, since he didn't know who was there or what they were doing.

I probably am streching it a little bit with my scenario, but Texas law is pretty liberal on the use of deadly force in your own home against an intruder. I sure wouldn't want to be a burglar in Texas that's for sure.

Thread jack... see link. somewhat relevant to Texas burglery law. I still can't believe this didn't make national news.